Premier Su Tseng-chang's (
This line of argument was previously used by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
It is repeated today with the double standard expressed through KMT Legislator Hong Hsiu-chu's (
To which I ask Hong, on what basis? In both cases, past and current political figures at nearly all levels of the national administration, working within a state structure inherited from a corrupt authoritarian government, have been the beneficiaries of certain funds over which far less than rigorous accounting has been exercised.
The President is indicted over embezzlement but prosecutors ignore former KMT chairmen Lien Chan (
The a historical and illogical reasoning of Su and Hong is symptomatic of Taiwan's rapid development, which symbolically and physically has rapidly built over history that is unpleasant to the eye or the mind, or which might later be evidence of deep scale corruption amongst ruling elites on all sides of the political spectrum.
Forget history! Build for the future! But what future? In what country? Under whose rules? I believe it is deeply destructive and counter-productive to disregard, simplify, apologize away or sensationalize history. It also undermines any current attempt to establish an honest political and judicial system that has integrity.
Premier Su's comments fall into the trap of the apologist, for which he can be rightly criticized, offering as he does universal absolution without requiring any repentance or future intent of honesty on the part of the still living guilty.
However, the current shambles of politicians and media egoists running around slapping each other with lawsuits is also an unsustainable form of democratic expression and simply reveals itself for what it is, a cut-throat, winner takes all, zero sum game for Taiwan, whether conducted legally or physically.
It is unsurprising that Taiwan struggles to come to terms with it's past and find it's identity. Many of the leading countries in the world face a similar problem. The Taiwanese can choose to emulate Premier Su, and my neighbor, who proudly wears a German Wehrmacht World War II motorcycle helmet as a fashion accessory, oblivious to and uncaring of it's historical context, or they can choose a more constructive approach.
Since compromise is often an end result of war, why not start at that position? One idea could be to declare a general amnesty for all government officials at all levels, including the president.
This would be done in lieu of a referendum on a new Constitution and national title, fresh elections for all national governmental positions (with incumbents prevented from running), the restructuring of the national government with a clear separation of powers, the establishment of an independent military that is loyal to the polity of Taiwan and not the Republic of China and an amnesty for the KMT and their assets, should they rescind their pledge of unification (read economic opportunism) and recognize and swear loyalty to Taiwan whether they are the ruling or opposition party?
In this way, Chinese elites and their assets would not be threatened and in return they would be required to share the burden of living in, protecting and nurturing this country in the face of China's imperial ambitions (read internal disintegration).
Ben Goren
Kaohsiung
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS